Effect of probiotic bacteria on porcine rotavirus OSU infection of porcine intestinal epithelial IPEC-J2 cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Rotavirus infections in nursing or post-weaning piglets are known to cause diarrhea, which can lead to commercial losses. Probiotic supplementation is used as a prophylactic or therapeutic approach to dealing with microbial infections in humans and animals. To evaluate the effect of probiotic bacteria on porcine rotavirus infections, non-transformed porcine intestinal epithelial IPEC-J2 cells were used as an in vitro model, and three different procedures were tested. When cells were exposed to seven probiotics at concentrations of 10 5 , 10 6 , or 10 7 CFU/mL for 16 h and removed before rotavirus challenge, infection reduction rates determined by flow cytometry were as follows: 15% (10 6 ) and 18% (10 5 ) for Bifidobacterium longum R0175, 15% (10 7 ) and 16% (10 6 ) for B . animalis lactis A026, and 15% (10 5 ) for Lactobacillus plantarum 299V. When cells were exposed to three selected probiotic strains for 1 h at higher concentrations, that is, 10 8 and 5 × 10 8 CFU/mL, before infection with rotavirus, no significant reduction was observed. When the probiotic bacteria were incubated with the virus before cell infection, a significant 14% decrease in the infection rate was observed for B. longum R0175. The results obtained using a cell-probiotics-virus platform combined with flow cytometry analysis suggest that probiotic bacteria can have a protective effect on IPEC-J2 cells before infection and can also prevent rotavirus infection of the cells.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".